[tor-relays] Unsubscribe

Tue Aug 9 05:26:49 UTC 2016

Unsub

Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com), Swiss-based encrypted email.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: tor-relays Digest, Vol 67, Issue 22
Local Time: August 8, 2016 2:00 AM
UTC Time: August 8, 2016 12:00 PM
From: tor-relays-request at lists.torproject.org
To: tor-relays at lists.torproject.org

Send tor-relays mailing list submissions to
tor-relays at lists.torproject.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
tor-relays-request at lists.torproject.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
tor-relays-owner at lists.torproject.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of tor-relays digest..."

Today's Topics:

1. Re: tor-relays Digest, Vol 67, Issue 12 (grarpamp)
2. Re: is explicit DirPort needed anymore under Tor 0.2.8.6? (teor)
3. Re: [PATCH] debian package upgrade restart issue (nusenu)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 01:40:59 -0400
From: grarpamp <grarpamp at gmail.com>
To: tor-relays at lists.torproject.org
Cc: flipchan at riseup.net
Subject: Re: [tor-relays] tor-relays Digest, Vol 67, Issue 12
Message-ID:
<CAD2Ti2-2R0KE+KA6EkMwVftA8G8Bi9OV4sYr0k=a-5CD=WeFtg at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 8/5/16, Flipchan <flipchan at riseup.net> wrote:
> [bad netiquette]

When replying to digests...
- At minimum, change the subject to the original subject.
Optimally also include proper header threading.
Repliers should subscribe to per message distribution instead.
- Delete all content from the original except some minimum
needed to establish context to which you are replying,
instead of spamming out longquotes of already said longtext.
- Reply inline below each piece of context to which you are
replying, instead of top posting.

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 17:33:42 +1000
From: teor <teor2345 at gmail.com>
To: tor-relays at lists.torproject.org
Subject: Re: [tor-relays] is explicit DirPort needed anymore under Tor
0.2.8.6?
Message-ID: <6AABDA0A-4835-4B2C-A60D-A7A64568BE65 at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

> On 3 Aug 2016, at 10:29, teor <teor2345 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Clients on 0.2.7.6 and earlier still use the IPv4 DirPort.
> (Tor Browser is still 0.2.7.6, and apps in general may take some time to upgrade.)
>
> Authorities on0.2.7.6 and earlier will only assign the HSDir flag to relays with an IPv4 DirPort.
> (Authorities may take some time to upgrade, because running different versions increases authority diversity.)

For the record, even though the man page entry for HidServDirectoryV2 says the DirPort is not required to be a HSDir, authorities on 0.2.7 and earlier still check for it before assigning the HSDir flag.

Authorities on 0.2.8 and later behave in a way that's consistent with HidServDirectoryV2, assigning the HSDir flag to any relay that wants to be a HSDir, and either supports being a directory cache, or has a DirPort.

HidServDirectoryV2 0|1
When this option is set, Tor accepts and serves v2 hidden service
descriptors. Setting DirPort is not required for this, because
clients connect via the ORPort by default. (Default: 1)

> Fallback directory mirrors must have a DirPort, and we'd only think about changing that when:
> * all recommended relay versions are 0.2.8 and later, and
> * relays no longer fetch documents using the DirPort (so maybe never).
>
> All relays running any Tor version will continue to use the IPv4 DirPort to fetch consensuses from other relays.
>
> So we haven't obsoleted the IPv4 DirPort yet. We've just made sure that clients fetch directory documents over an encrypted channel.

Tim Wilson-Brown (teor)

teor2345 at gmail dot com
PGP C855 6CED 5D90 A0C5 29F6 4D43 450C BA7F 968F 094B
ricochet:ekmygaiu4rzgsk6n
xmpp: teor at torproject dot org

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/attachments/20160808/b29f3270/attachment-0001.sig>

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2016 11:53:00 +0000
From: nusenu <nusenu at openmailbox.org>
To: tor-relays at lists.torproject.org
Subject: Re: [tor-relays] [PATCH] debian package upgrade restart issue
Message-ID: <14e8de2a-577d-6498-e976-0002545b5a7e at openmailbox.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

>> When upgrading, all running tor instances are stopped (not restarted, as expected)
>
> This might be your root-cause as well?
>
> https://github.com/nusenu/ansible-relayor/issues/72
>
> I'm generating instance names based on IP addresses_ORport (so they
> contain "." and "_") and are therefore filtered by the generator.
>
> Is it acceptable to add "." and "_" to the whitelist?
>
> (patches attached)

Based on the output of 'systemd-escape' (a tool that escapes strings for
use in unit names) it is safe to use "." and "_" in unit names.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/attachments/20160808/73daa746/attachment-0001.sig>

------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays at lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

------------------------------

End of tor-relays Digest, Vol 67, Issue 22
******************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/attachments/20160809/071ed39f/attachment-0001.html>